scholarly journals Academic bullying: How to be an ally

Science ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 373 (6558) ◽  
pp. 974-974
Author(s):  
Morteza Mahmoudi
Keyword(s):  
Academic Bullying

Academic Bullying Inventory

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matti Meriläinen ◽  
Kristi Kõiv
Keyword(s):  
Academic Bullying

Editorial | Stop the Academic Bullying: Our Internal Reflections for a Fairer Peer Reviews [Hentikan Perundungan Akademik: Refleksi Internal untuk Penilaian Sejawat yang Lebih Adil]

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Edwin Adrianta Surijah
Keyword(s):  
Career Development ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Editorial Note ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Academic Bullying ◽  
New Guidelines ◽  
The Impact

Academic bullying in peer reviews is a cultural problem. This Editorial Note is intended to identify the unhelpful comments/critiques and to highlight the impact of unprofessional peer reviews toward the well-being and career development of fellow researchers. We acknowledge that we are part of the problems, and the necessary steps are needed to break the chain of the academic bullying culture in peer reviews. New guidelines for editors and reviewers are part of the solutions to promote constructive comments, as well as stronger internal consolidation throughout the peer reviews process.   Perundungan akademik dalam penilaian sejawat (peer review) adalah sebuah permasalahan kultur. Catatan Editorial ini bertujuan mengindentifikasi komentar atau kritik yang tidak membangun, serta menggarisbawahi dampak penilaian sejawat yang tidak profesional terhadap kesejahteraan dan pengembangan karir sesama peneliti. Kami menyadari bahwa kami merupakan bagian dari permasalahan ini, dan diperlukan langkah-langkah untuk memutus rantai kultur perundungan akademik dalam penilaian sejawat. Pedoman baru bagi editor dan mitra bestari merupakan bagian dari solusi untuk mendorong komentar yang konstruktif, serta konsolidasi internal yang lebih kuat dalam proses penilaian sejawat.

scholarly journals Improve reporting systems for academic bullying

Nature ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 562 (7728) ◽  
pp. 494-494 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morteza Mahmoudi
Keyword(s):  
Reporting Systems ◽  
Academic Bullying

scholarly journals The urgent need for modification of scientific ranking indexes to facilitate scientific progress and diminish academic bullying

Bioimpacts ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morteza Mahmoudi ◽  
Saya Ameli ◽  
Sherry Moss
Keyword(s):  
Financial Distress ◽  
Empirical Work ◽  
Scientific Progress ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
H Index ◽  
Root Cause ◽  
Abusive Behavior ◽  
Junior Staff ◽  
Academic Bullying ◽  
Verbal Insults

Academic bullying occurs when senior scientists direct abusive behavior such as verbal insults, public shaming, isolation, and threatening toward vulnerable junior colleagues such as postdocs, graduate students and lab members. We believe that one root cause of bullying behavior is the pressure felt by scientists to compete for rankings designed to measure their scientific worth. These ratings, such as the h-index, have several unintended consequences, one of which we believe is academic bullying. Under pressure to achieve higher and higher rankings, in exchange for positive evaluations, grants and recognition, senior scientists exert undue pressure on their junior staff in the form of bullying. Lab members have little or no recourse due to the lack of fair institutional protocols for investigating bullying, dependence on grant or institutional funding, fear of losing time and empirical work by changing labs, and vulnerability to visa cancellation threats among international students. We call for institutions to reconsider their dependence on these over-simplified surrogates for real scientific progress and to provide fair and just protocols that will protect targets of academic bullying from emotional and financial distress.

Academic Bullying: Taking the Hallway Chats to the Level of Formalized Policy

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 318-322 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen S. Meaney ◽  
Sonya L. Armstrong
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Content Analysis ◽  
Policy Development ◽  
Workplace Bullying ◽  
Higher Education Institutions ◽  
Institutional Policies ◽  
University Campuses ◽  
Policy Review ◽  
Academic Bullying ◽  
Adult Bullying

Bullying in any context adversely affects individuals and organizations. Although bullying is typically conceived of as an issue specific to children in schoolyards, adult bullying is widespread, and the literature on workplace bullying continues to emerge as a scholarly focus. More specifically, academic bullying in higher-education institutions has been identified as an area of particular interest. Considerable literature exists that addresses definitions, characteristics, and effects of faculty bullying; however, the literature is scant regarding effective practice and policy that explicitly aim to prevent academic bullying. Furthermore, although this is a topic often discussed informally on university campuses, it does not appear to be addressed explicitly in formalized institutional policies. In this manuscript, the authors provide the findings of the initial stages of a content analysis aimed at exploring extant policy at public doctoral-granting universities. Implications and recommendations for policy development based on the results of this policy review are provided.

A survivor’s guide to academic bullying

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (11) ◽  
pp. 1091-1091 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morteza Mahmoudi
Keyword(s):  
Academic Bullying

scholarly journals Systematic review of academic bullying in medical settings: dynamics and consequences

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. e043256
Author(s):  
Tauben Averbuch ◽  
Yousif Eliya ◽  
Harriette Gillian Christine Van Spall
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Medical Settings ◽  
Academic Medical ◽  
Academic Bullying ◽  
Bullying Interventions ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Academic Medical Settings

PurposeTo characterise the dynamics and consequences of bullying in academic medical settings, report factors that promote academic bullying and describe potential interventions.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesWe searched EMBASE and PsycINFO for articles published between 1 January 1999 and 7 February 2021.Study selectionWe included studies conducted in academic medical settings in which victims were consultants or trainees. Studies had to describe bullying behaviours; the perpetrators or victims; barriers or facilitators; impact or interventions. Data were assessed independently by two reviewers.ResultsWe included 68 studies representing 82 349 respondents. Studies described academic bullying as the abuse of authority that impeded the education or career of the victim through punishing behaviours that included overwork, destabilisation and isolation in academic settings. Among 35 779 individuals who responded about bullying patterns in 28 studies, the most commonly described (38.2% respondents) was overwork. Among 24 894 individuals in 33 studies who reported the impact, the most common was psychological distress (39.1% respondents). Consultants were the most common bullies identified (53.6% of 15 868 respondents in 31 studies). Among demographic groups, men were identified as the most common perpetrators (67.2% of 4722 respondents in 5 studies) and women the most common victims (56.2% of 15 246 respondents in 27 studies). Only a minority of victims (28.9% of 9410 victims in 25 studies) reported the bullying, and most (57.5%) did not perceive a positive outcome. Facilitators of bullying included lack of enforcement of institutional policies (reported in 13 studies), hierarchical power structures (7 studies) and normalisation of bullying (10 studies). Studies testing the effectiveness of anti-bullying interventions had a high risk of bias.ConclusionsAcademic bullying commonly involved overwork, had a negative impact on well-being and was not typically reported. Perpetrators were most commonly consultants and men across career stages, and victims were commonly women. Methodologically robust trials of anti-bullying interventions are needed.LimitationsMost studies (40 of 68) had at least a moderate risk of bias. All interventions were tested in uncontrolled before–after studies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document